Focus Items vs. Elemental Effects Options

[GrinderTheTroll]

So say you get hit with a Toxic-wave spell or something similar what would the roll be like for your foci? Would you use OR or perhaps consider adding the foci rating to the OR as well? The argument being more powerful foci are more durable, etc.

Any thoughts?

[tjn]

Enless specifically targeted, I wouldn't deal with it.

Either:

• The GM is being an ass.
• The GM let something in the campaign and is trying to take it out (at which point talking oocly to the player would work better then taking the character's toys away arbitrarily).
• Or the GM is obsessed with realism.

[GrinderTheTroll]

So you never cook off ammo when folks get hit with fireballs or never have other electronics short-out when hit with lightning? I mean, that's why the drain is so high on these because they have secondary effects. People like to kill mages first because of things like this.

Often when my players face down another mage, they might want to think twice before using such spells in hope to loot some foci when the bad-guy goes down rather than melt them into slag.

[spitfire gecko]

Getting your belt of ammo fried isn't exactly on the same level as having that force 6 focus that you've spent the last ten runs saving up money for get completely destroyed.

[RangerJoe]

It all depends on how the player has described the nature and position of his focus. If a player comes to the table as a Voudon, sporitng a giant floppy tophat (power focus), complete with dangelling plastic skeletons and synth velour, he should not be surprised when an elemental fire spell doing M or more damage catches his precious hat on fire. Now, as a GM, I'd tend to let him try to put it out (there's nothing quite as funny than a PC smacking his head to extinguish flames, or stopping, dropping, and rolling in the middle of combat, neh?), but frankly, there are always risks to posessing obvious or fragile and expensive goods.

[tjn]

[GrinderTheTroll]

I am not making this a personal attack tjn, I am just curious what folks have done in situations like this.

[Cain]

All righty, here's the rules on the subject. Normally, objects do not get a resistance roll vs magic. However, magical items do get a roll, and they get to roll to resist EM's (as they're treated like any normal attack). So, they get a standard resistance of force vs spell, as well as an OR test to resist secondary effects.

The other thing to remember is that while there are specific rules of ammo cookoff, there's no rules for partial damage to ordinary items. So, if said item takes anything short of a deadly wound, it is still intact and functional-- although how functional depends on the GM's good graces.

Personally? I don't bother with this stuff much. I find it slows down the game to make OR tests against every object a player is carrying. But YMMV, I guess.

[edit: missed this line:]

[Zeel De Mort]

Also, don't bonded foci get a karma pool equal to their force or somesuch? For when they get dragged through wards etc. Or is that quickened spells, or both? I would look it up, but my books are a good 2m away right now.

Anyway, that, and the fact that bonded foci are way harder to replace than, say, an assault rifle, would lead me (if I were a GM) to rule that they don't follow the same rules as ordinary equipment. I'm not a big fan of most of the secondary effects anyway though, so well..

[Necro Tech]

[RedmondLarry]

I don't have an official quote. But our team plays that the link is broken upon the magician's death. If we come upon a used focus with no magicial link on it, we guess that the old owner is dead or the new owner hasn't completed bonding it.

[Nerbert]

My D&D game masters roll saves for absolutely everything on our possessions whenever we get hit with any kind of damaging elemental effect spell. On the one hand, it makes using those sorts of spells that much more complicated. On the other hand, it slows the game down to a crawl and can potentially reduce many hours of gameplay into just so much pointless dice rolling.

First of all, a focus is a magical item, imbued with power beyond mortal ken. So maybe it is somewhat immune to being damaged by magical effects?

However, there's nothing wrong with nap'ing a scorceror and having one of his items dissapear. But it shouldn't be something that will reduce the character to worthlessness.

[Cain]

[kevyn668]

[BitBasher]

[Ol' Scratch]

Not everyone wants to play a human with Blandness who dresses in dark non-descript clothing.

Allowing a character to have a power focus in the form of a hat that's 100% within their character concept that only adds style and flavor to the character, then destroying it "just because" while leaving Mr. Boring's identical power focus alone because he described it as {insert something boring worn under his clothing so that it only provides bonuses and no on will ever see it because he's a dull twat of a character} is simply a GM being a dick.

[Bigity]

Heh, you can have a player hide power foci without it being "boring". One person I know had her character (also a girl) with a piercing as a power focus. Use your imagination as to where.

I don't like to randomly destroy gear unless it needs to happen for whatever reason...but I still miss the grounding rules. Anyone still use them?

[BitBasher]

By that token, playing a gypsy whose power focus is a fragile eggshell thin crystal baseball sized sphere that has to be held in hand may also enrich a character background and concept, but it would be reasonably very likely that it may be broken and it a freaking bad decision to take it shadowrunning.

Where do you draw the line as to what is "just accomadating a player" and what is "altering reality in a way that is unrealistic just because a player wants to"?

It all depends on the game, you can't make a blanket statement like that. Some games are very down and gritty and not of the type that will displace reality and consequneces for style. Others leave style as king as displace atmosphere and realism for said style.

Neither is wrong, and by that token neither is always right.

Some players dislike one style whereas some dislike the other. My current players would chastise a player playing the character with a floppy flammable hat because it will likely eventually be damaged in the gritty type of game they enjoy playing. They would expect it eventually. That may not stop someone from doing it, but at least he knows where he stands.

[kevyn668]

I'd say the "egg shell example" is on the far side of the line separating "just accomadating a player" and "altering reality in a way that is unrealistic just because a player wants to"?

I've seen people in these very threads describing placing an impossibly large gun with accessories in a thigh holster....spacewise, that just don't fit but it happens. [shrugs]


I'd probably think that the "hat guy" is kinda foolish, too. But at the same time I think its a cool concept and he shouldn't have to live in mortal fear of losing that focus just because he went with "hat" instead of "ring". I guess in that sopt, if I were Gm, I'd probably tell the guy his hat is singed but the magic still works...I dunno.

[Ol' Scratch]

Destroying a focus just because it's form is more fragile than others? As in someone creates a focus out of a scarf, so you burn it up because it's simple cloth while another character who created their identical focus in the form of a golden amulet tucked under their shirt gets off scott free? That's just not right.

If an attack is directed at an obvious focus, like a gypsy twirling a fragile sphere between her fingers while working some mojo, I have no problem with it being attacked and possibly destroyed. That's what you get for showing it off and letting your enemies know its the source of your power. But I'm not going to assume it's any more fragile than any other focus simply because the player decided to give their character something they thought was cool and only added flavor to said character.

Your mileage obviously varies, but there's no way I'd do anything like that. It's just not fair to the player or the character.

[BitBasher]

[kevyn668]

Memo to self: when playing in BitBasher's games my foci will be sturdy constructs.
:D

[BitBasher]

[kevyn668]

Adendum to memo to self: don't play a mage. :D (Which is cool, b/c I like gunbunny/covert ops guys!)

[BitBasher]